China’s economic rise has shocked and threatened the world. In just a few decades China has risen rapidly in economic power, and its citizens have benefited greatly. However, China has not achieved this incredible economic gain without sacrifices. One main sacrifice that China has made is human rights, both internally and externally through foreign investment.
China’s strict authoritarian government has benefitted the country in certain respects. The efficiency of China’s government allows it to quickly decide on action courses and cuts out the time-consuming bureaucratic rules and procedures that currently plague India. This comes at the cost, though, of freedom of speech and censorship. It even causes gross human rights violations such as the occurrences in Tianamen Square. These demonstrations, now almost two decades ago, firmly stemmed the right of civil society to interfere in government affairs. However, as China’s economic rise empowers its citizens, how can China expect to control the wealthier and more educated middle class. Currently, political scientists postulate that the Chinese are willing to sacrifice their rights for economic growth. Still, doesn’t this willingness end at a certain point. China cannot indefinitely maintain this GDP growth rate, nor can it continue repression of a population that has increasingly more resources with which to combat the state. This is not to say that China’s state is weak or will quickly fall to any civilian rebellion. However, as this repression continues and economic growth slows, can China maintain order in its state? Will it be forced to liberalize its government, just as it in the past liberalized its economy? Is it building a country on false pretenses, ignoring the inequalities simmering directly under the surface and when these tensions arise what will happen to all the progress that China has made? Should China begin to acknowledge these problems and slowly resolve them so that they do not cause revolution in the future? Or are these tensions unlikely to erupt and are not worth addressing compared to the economic force of China?
China’s abrupt rise has also posed questions for international human rights advocates. China has invested billions of dollars in unsavory regimes such as Sudan, Burma, and Zimbabwe. China has also supplied governments with weapons that they then use to massacre their people such as Sudan. This causes an unfavorable reaction from the rest of the world who believe that the Chinese are then indirectly responsible for these crimes. China maintains that it does not have responsibility for government actions and that all it is doing is trading. Is this a correct assumption on China’s part? Are states responsible for global human rights or does each only hold the necessity to protect its own people? Though China also abuses the rights of its own citizens.
China’s rise has hinged upon abuse of human rights both domestically and internationally. Is this a system that can remain, or is China building an economy on an unstable base that will eventually crumble? What actions should the Chinese government and the international community take to guard against revolutions protesting these issues?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
It is unfair to say that China's rise has hinged upon abuse of human rights internationally. Again, I feel that once again China is harshly cast in comparison with long-developed countries of the west. China's relations with Africa are nothing new: Zhou Enlai made a visit to Africa in the 60s and has since been a source of investment. In fact, PR China's entry into the UN largely relied on the support of third world countries, many of which were African. Regardless, the fact is that China's investment in Africa is strictly economically. China builds infrastructure in African countries and gets oil from Africa well. Economically speaking, and this is often what Chinese are most concerned about, Africa is largely untapped. The developed world is often afraid to invest in Africa for stability reasons, but China, as a developing country itself, sees it as a great opportunity. So in no way does China solely rely on Africa's brutal to increase its economic gains. But certainly, China is starting to realize the economic trade, relations, does come with its political responsibilities. China is still new to its position as a rising world power, and it is learning, and has to, incorporate politics and economics together, both internationally and domestically.
While it was certainly an unnecessary exaggeration on my part to say that China's rise has only depended on human rights abuse (sorry I didn't mean to sound so judgemental) there are still inherent issues in China's investment policies. I don't believe that I have the right to judge whether China is right or wrong to invest economically in areas that have on-going human rights violations. China's involvedment in Africa certainly has benefits for both the Chinese and the Africans. However, it also does in some cases accelerate problems such as the ethnic cleansing in Sudan. Whether or not this is the responsibility of the Chinese, the Western countries condem China for these actions. It may be unfair to judge China along the same lines as long-developed countries, but people still do. Keeping this in mind without making morality judgements, will China be forced to change its policies by the Western influence and how will this affect its current economy? As it incorporates politics and economics togehter, how will these developments affect stability and foreign relations?
Post a Comment